Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The supporting argument conflates the causal explanation ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Distrust is not merely the negation of trust.

    The supporting argument conflates the causal explanation of why one distrusts with the constitutive content of distrust itself, committing a genetic fallacy.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Genetic fallacy occurs when origin invalidates present content; explaining distrust's cause doesn't determine what distrust actually is.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Distrust's constitutive nature (what makes it distrust) is logically distinct from its etiology (why someone came to distrust).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An argument equating causal origins with essential properties commits exactly the error genetic fallacies target.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The origins of mental states partially constitute their content; how distrust forms shapes what counts as that emotional state.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Not all causal-to-constitutive arguments are genetic fallacies; some causal histories are legitimately relevant to definition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The charge assumes a sharp fact/value or origin/essence distinction that may not hold for trust-related concepts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    An argument equating causal origins with essential properties commits exactly th...Distrust is not merely the negation of trust.Distrust's constitutive nature (what makes it distrust) is logically distinct fr...Genetic fallacy occurs when origin invalidates present content; explaining distr...
    +3 moreShow less
    Not all causal-to-constitutive arguments are genetic fallacies; some causal hist...The charge assumes a sharp fact/value or origin/essence distinction that may not...The origins of mental states partially constitute their content; how distrust fo...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit